Bill from Stockton reoprts on the Nichols-Steinberg appearance in Stockton

I don't have time to do this stuff- but I made time to go to the meeting and
heard the consultants and experts talk about transit , moving jobs to
where people live, increasing housing density to 7.7 per acre...Mary
Nichols talked about how the pollution around the Socal ports was so bad
that people nearby were fighting expansion. And without a
trace of irony she talked about using natural gas to accomplish it...
...and they let people speak...

That would be ME. I think it's the 1st time I've spoken in public. The gist of what I said:
Having a forum on "Smart Growth" was a little odd - Stockton's problem is trying to have smart contraction.The thing that was impacting housing density was ... teardowns.Told Stienberg I was a mostly Dem voter ... but I'd come to regard Sacramento as an economic wrecking ball.And CARB was a Mt. Everest of bad and fraudulent science. That if we judged by CARB's past initiatives
we should be wary of "smart growth". Launched into the laundry list :AB32 didn't make sense when we're downwind of China, and they're building 3 coal-fired power plants a week.Quoted Prof. Ramanathan(?) of UC San Diego / Scripps Institute that 7x % of soot in our air came from Asia.
So the DPF law didn't make a lot of sense.Enhanced vapor recovery (3%) put people(i know one) out of business for no good reason, and the deadline came during a credit crunch.

Well I rambled on... and they took the mic before I got to the big finish - Hien Tran.
That ethanol was boosting feed prices and killing our #1 product in San Joaquin County : dairy.

There was another speaker talking about natural gas.

After the meeting several people came up and said I had made a lot of sense. I handed out my
"call your congressman about HR1380" biz cards.

Steinberg of course was unaffected, he spoke and sort of acknowledged the factors external to CA. The key thing
he said that was important was "if you want change you have to show up". Our side needs to do more/show up more,
i.e. to get HR1380 passed.

As Stienberg was leaving I ran after him and said we should get rid of ethanol in favor of natural gas. His reply: "That''s
a federal matter". I was left wondering why we can tell Washington to take a hike on the subject of smoking dope, but on
on ethanol we need to be in lock-step?Then I began to wonder if the Capitol Building in Sacramento is downwind of toomany
medical marijuana places. It would explain a lot... like why so many
legislators seem to forget to represent their citizens.

Officials make pitch for reduced emissions

STOCKTON - Two of California's highest-ranking
public officials - Mary Nichols, head of the state Air Resources Board,
and Darrell Steinberg, president pro tem of the state Senate - made
their way Friday to downtown Stockton.

They
were the cornerstone speakers in a forum on legislation that encourages
sustainable communities. More than 100 people, many of them stakeholders
in environmental issues and many of them ordinary residents, listened
while Nichols, Steinberg and others explained Senate Bill 375 and its
goals.

The law attempts to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions by changing transportation patterns. Here's how that
thinking goes: By creating local jobs, higher-density housing and more
transportation options, people will stay closer to where they live and
spend less time commuting - thus, their communities will be more
sustainable.

The message from Sacramento was received
respectfully - even at times of disagreement - in a lively discussion of
California's continuing drive toward greener, more sustainable
communities.

"Having Nichols and Steinberg,
today was a success," said Andrew Chesley, executive director of the San
Joaquin Coun- cil of Governments and host of the event. "Government
works best when all the interests work together."

SB375,
written by Steinberg, became California law in 2008. It is designed to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions (primarily carbon dioxide) through a set
of incentives.

"The carrots are increased
transportation funding, an expedited process through the environmental
hoops and redevelopment incentives," Nichols said. "The sticks? Nada.
There are none."

She and Steinberg emphasized
repeatedly that implementation of the legislation is voluntary and does
not carry penalties for those communities, or metropolitan planning
organizations, that do not utilize it.

That
said, SB375 sets standards for reducing greenhouse gas emissions that
vary region by region in California. The eight-county San Joaquin Valley
has two reduction targets: 5 percent per capita by 2025 and 10 percent
by 2035.

"Three seventy-five does not make
anybody do anything," Nichols said. "If you choose (a strategy for a
sustainable community), there are benefits. The answer to how 375 is
implemented is sitting in this room. It's a local decision."

Some
of those in attendance weren't interested. One audience member read
from the "Communist Manifesto" and another blamed Sacramento for the
state's slumping economy and high unemployment rate.

Steinberg said he welcomed the exchange of ideas with local residents and said he was gratified by the interest.

After
explaining the history of the legislation, Steinberg said, "Here is an
opportunity - and we don't get them very often - to actually change the
paradigm in California."

Chesley used the forum to present the San Joaquin County of Governments' approach to the sustainability legislation.

"For
generations, we have equated mobility (the automobile) with personal
well being and wealth," Chesley said. "Three seventy-five challenges
that."

Each speaker emphasized the value of walking, biking, exercising and moving within a smaller, sustained sphere.